On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 8:19 AM Andre Vehreschild wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I don't like the new keyword. Could we do "stdcomp" (for "standard compliant")
> or something like that? When a keyword allows a question mark, I would even
> add
> that, i.e.. like "stdcomp?". Or when we like to go with int
Hi all,
I don't like the new keyword. Could we do "stdcomp" (for "standard compliant")
or something like that? When a keyword allows a question mark, I would even add
that, i.e.. like "stdcomp?". Or when we like to go with interp then at least
add "std", i.e. "stdinterp". "interp" alone to me is t
On 2/9/25 12:54 AM, Thomas Koenig wrote:
Am 08.02.25 um 22:46 schrieb Harald Anlauf:
looks good, just two minor comments:
+ actual_name = act_sym->name ? act_sym->name : act_sym->name;
Why not just
+ actual_name = act_sym->name;
?
That was a leftover from a previous commit.
+
On 2/9/25 1:07 AM, Thomas Koenig wrote:
Hello world,
looking at a few Fortran bug reports, I found some cases where
it was not clear if the program in question was standard-conforming
or not. I would propose to add a keyword for that, tentatively
called "interp".
Comments? Suggestions for a di
Hello world,
looking at a few Fortran bug reports, I found some cases where
it was not clear if the program in question was standard-conforming
or not. I would propose to add a keyword for that, tentatively
called "interp".
Comments? Suggestions for a different name? Should I just go ahead
and
Am 08.02.25 um 22:46 schrieb Harald Anlauf:
looks good, just two minor comments:
+ actual_name = act_sym->name ? act_sym->name : act_sym->name;
Why not just
+ actual_name = act_sym->name;
?
That was a leftover from a previous commit.
+ gfc_error ("Type mismatch pa
